Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board

Archive through June 05, 2022

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Federation & Empire: F&E WARBOOK: Next Update: Basic Set: Archive through June 05, 2022

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, February 21, 2022 - 05:40 am: Edit

FEDS SUGGESTS adding the following to the Basic Set update:

(600.7) SCENARIO ADJUSTMENTS: Most advanced F&E scenarios assume players are using all available F&E modules and their associated units. Players wanting to play scenarios found in other F&E products but may not have all the modules and may have to adjust those scenarios to account for units not available for games or in other cases, the players may choose not to use a given module and its associated units. Whatever the case, players can substitute another unit for a specialty unit from the unused module on a one-for-one basis as long is the substitution is available for that year and is not a limited or restricted production ship. Use these guidelines:

(600.71) Carriers: Substitute another available carrier or standard warship of the same basic hull or smaller size class from basic F&E with any excess fighters lost in the substitution.
(600.72) PFTs/Scouts: Substitute another smaller, available PFT or scout (if the ship was also a scout) or standard warship of the same basic hull or smaller size class from basic F&E with any excess PFs added to the faction’s PF pool. The substitution cannot gain EW factors.
(600.73) Carrier/PFT Hybrid Ships: Substitute another available PFT or carrier or scout (if the ship were also a scout) or standard warship of the same basic hull or smaller size class from basic F&E with any excess fighters lost in the substitution and/or PFs added to the faction’s PF pool. (Category includes: SCS, DCS, etc.) SCSs are permitted to be exchanged for CVAs of the same or smaller hulled ships.
(600.74) Escorts and FCRs: Substitute another available escort or standard warship of the same basic hull or smaller size class from basic F&E.
(600.75) Other Ships (including, commando, transport, maulers; X-ships; etc.): Substitute another available standard warship or scout (if the ship was also a scout) of the same basic hull or smaller size class from basic F&E.
(600.76) Other Non-Ship Units and Counters: Remove these from play (includes: monitors, auxiliaries, PRDs, APTs, PTRs, DIPs, PTs, ENGs, MMGs, ADMs, MEGAs, decoys, etc.). Military convoys become standard convoys.
(600.77) Bases: SFBs become SBs; STBs and BSs become BTSs; OPBs become MBs; X-bases become standard versions. Colony Bases (CB) become MBs; colonies are simply removed.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Monday, February 21, 2022 - 10:21 am: Edit

How about offering the Lyran player the choice?

Start a new BB from scratch, no booster die roll
Use a CA/CC as a base for a new BB, "CA/CC booster" die roll as Chuck lists above
Use a DN as a base for a new BB, "DN booster" die roll as Chuck lists above. DN center section is cannibalized to accelerate the BB construction.
Use a DN as a base for a new BB, "CA/CC booster" die roll as Chuck lists above. DN center section is removed and then becomes a DND. DND already listed in the SIT.

If the player chooses #4, the DND could be:

Used as DND warship counter, just like any other ship.
Combined with a DD to make a CAL. Conversion costs listed in the SIT.
Combined with a CA/CC to make a DN. Conversion costs listed in the SIT.

The Lyran player could choose option #1 for the DND for a while, and then choose #2 or #3 later (possibly after the DND was crippled in combat?).

--Mike

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Monday, February 21, 2022 - 11:22 am: Edit

>> (600.7) SCENARIO ADJUSTMENTS: Most advanced F&E scenarios assume players are using all available F&E modules and their associated units.

Suggest saying the most recent versions of the base F&E game and all available F&E modules.

Throughout, does it make sense to limit substitutions to just basic F&E? Players may have older versions of the base game, or some expansion modules, or something like Carrier War, or some frankenstein combination of this and that from the 35+ years of F&E. Could players have a better matching substitution on hand that isn't in basic F&E?

>> (600.71) Carrier:

Suggest adding with the same number or fewer fighter factors
FEDS CONCURS.

>> (600.73) Carrier/PFT Hybrid Ships:

Confirm that an SCS could be replaced with a CVA, which would have more fighter factors, and that is OK?
FED CONCURS.

>> (600.74) Escorts and FCRs:

Should a player be allowed the option to replace an FCR with an escort carrier? So an F5R could be replaced with F5, F5E, or F5V?
FEDS NON-CONCURS. FCRs should not become carriers.

>> (600.75) Other Ships

Could a D5S be substituted for a D6S? It is not the same basic hull or smaller size class.
FEDS: This would meet the intent of this rule.

--Mike

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Tuesday, February 22, 2022 - 09:32 am: Edit

Mike wrote:

Quote:
>> (600.74) Escorts and FCRs:

Should a player be allowed the option to replace an FCR with an escort carrier? So an F5R could be replaced with F5, F5E, or F5V?

No. FCRs have a very different role than escort carriers. In no way should an FCR be replaced by an escort carrier for any empire when playing with the module that the FCR appears in. When replacing the FCR you are given the choice to replace the FCR with the same sized or smaller escort or the same sized or smaller standard warship. Given that many of the later scenarios have carrier groups with crippled and/or missing escorts the ability to choose the escort over the standard warship is going to be the preferred choice of most players. It either brings the group up to full strength or provides an escort that could be used to "overstuff" an already full group under (515.2).

Quote:
>> (600.73) Carrier/PFT Hybrid Ships:

Confirm that an SCS could be replaced with a CVA, which would have more fighter factors, and that is OK?

This is ok because there is a drop in the group compot. A full PF flotilla is 12pts. When replaced with a full group of heavy fighters the compot drops by 4 points or 6 points if heavy fighters are not in play.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Tuesday, February 22, 2022 - 11:26 am: Edit

MikeE - I think you have the right idea.

A BB starts with a d6, having the CA sides (disruptors, phasers and systems) adds to the base, the DN center adds about half the weapons and less than half of the other systems to the BB center.

With that in mind, I can see the CA providing a solid base of 4 or if the DN center is thrown in being a d6+2. Instead of a 3.5/6 for the first roll, the Lyrans would have either 7.5/10 or 9/14 to start with (which still leaves 5 turns at max rolls in either case [30/26]).

Anyone else want to throw some darts (numbers) on this board (CA base of 5, or the combo as d6+3)??

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Tuesday, February 22, 2022 - 07:00 pm: Edit

>> In no way should an FCR be replaced by an escort carrier for any empire when playing with the module that the FCR appears in.

Agreed. I believe these comments are in response to Chuck posting suggestions for when a scenario includes certain units and the players do not have the modules/counters that include those units, and then need guidance for appropriate substitutions?

>> When replacing the FCR you are given the choice to replace the FCR with the same sized or smaller escort or the same sized or smaller standard warship

Exactly. I am suggesting adding as an option the ability to replace the FCR (where not available) with a CVE, so the controlling empire gets the benefit of the replacement fighters, which are very valuable economically. An FCR has 6. An escort has 0. A CVE would typically have 4, which is closer to the 6 and gives the owning empire something closer economically. 6 replacement fighters per turn is around 1.2 EP in ship repair equivalents -- that adds up.

Then the player could choose, for example, if the F5, F5E, or F5V (or equivalent for other empires) is the better substitute for the F5R based upon their assessment of the scenario situation.

--Mike

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Tuesday, February 22, 2022 - 10:42 pm: Edit

Mike,

FCR fighters are not active fighters. They do not count for pinning (203.54). The cannot react (205.142) or use offensive fighter strikes (319.0). This limits their utility to an emergency escort which is risky under some circumstances but totally acceptable under other circumstances.

Escort Carrier Fighters count for pinning (203.54), can use reaction movement (205.142) and be used in offensive fighter strikes (319.0). The fighters may also be used in SSC (310.0).

Allowing FCRs to be replaced by escort carriers changes game balance because the fighters go from inactive to active. Even if it changes from 0.0 to 0.5 ship equivalents it is a change.

By Daniel Glenn Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Thursday, February 24, 2022 - 05:00 pm: Edit

But it is not a totally unbalanced change as not using FCRs will likely affect both sides in nearly equal numbers. The Klingons get an F5V in place of an F5R, the Kzinti get a CVE in place of an FCR. Not 100% equal, but not drastically far off as an exchange on both sides. Both sides pick up approximately half a pin equivalent. The Klingon got 1 extra fighter factor, but the Kzinti got theirs on a CL hull.

If this was an issue that gave one side something and the other side nothing you would have a point. But this is a case of both sides figuring out a reasonable replacement for something they're both going to have to swap out.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Thursday, February 24, 2022 - 05:04 pm: Edit

I agree with Thomas - as there are additional unbalancing factors.

A CVE will never be a good carrier group and the Kzinti will not have enough escorts for it.

A FV though with an AD5 and F5E is a modest carrier - and they can build enough escorts to use it as a modest carrier.

So - one side gains a useful hull... and the other side doesn't.

So keep it simple and swop out specialist hulls for vanilla hulls for everyone.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Sunday, March 06, 2022 - 05:47 pm: Edit

(509.1-C) FEDS RECOMMENDS ADDING this text to the end of the rule (509.1-C) Move/Set Up Mobile Base:
"A convoy or military convoy‡ can move and set up a MB; see restrictions under (414.611)."

================

(509.1-J1) FEDS RECOMMENDS ADDING this text to the end of the rule (509.1-J1) Repair a Base:
"A convoy or military convoy‡ can repair a base; see restrictions under (414.613)."

================

(509.1-J2) FEDS RECOMMENDS ADDING this text to the end of the rule (509.1-J2) Upgrade Base:
"A convoy or military convoy‡ can perform a single step base upgrade; see restrictions under (414.612)."
================

(509.1-J3) FEDS RECOMMENDS ADDING this text to the end of the rule (509.1-J3) Install SFGs‡:
"A convoy or military convoy‡ can Install SFGs‡; see restrictions under (414.612)."

================

(509.1-J4) FEDS RECOMMENDS ADDING this text to the end of the rule (509.1-J4) Install Base Modules‡:
"A convoy or military convoy‡ can install up to three modules on a base per turn; see restrictions under (414.612)."

================

(509.1-K1FEDS RECOMMENDS ADDING this text to the end of the rule (509.1-K1) Deliver PDUs/PGBs‡/IDUs‡:
"A convoy or military convoy‡ can carry one PDU/PGU/IDU; see restrictions under (414.611)."

================

(509.1-K2) FEDS RECOMMENDS ADDING this text to the end of the rule (509.1-K2) Upgrade PDUs/PGBs:
"A convoy or military convoy‡ can upgrade one PDU/PGU/IDU; see restrictions under (414.611)."

================

(509.1-Z) FEDS RECOMMENDS ADDING this text to the end of the rule (509.1-Z) Build Minor Shipyard‡:
"A convoy or military convoy‡ can upgrade one PDU/PGU/IDU; see restrictions under (414.62)."

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, March 07, 2022 - 04:24 pm: Edit

(509.1-C) FEDS RECOMMENDS MODIFYING this rule and separating the mission into two sections for clarity; suggested text:

(509.1-C1) Move Mobile Base: Transport units can be assigned this mission (510.2) during the Phasing Player Turn at the moment it begins Operational Movement or Strategic Movement, or as part of the Final Activity Phase (10C). A tug, convoy (or military convoy‡), two LTTs, an LTT‡ and a theater transport‡ (TT), or two TTs can move a MB; a convoy can do only using operational movement per (414.61). This mission is also used to move ISC pacification stations‡. TTs must have the 'U' designator to move a MB unless excepted by rule.

(509.1-C2) Set Up Mobile Base: Transport units can be assigned this mission (510.2) during the Phasing Player Turn at the moment it begins Operational Movement or Strategic Movement, or as part of the Final Activity Phase (10C). A tug, convoy (or military convoy‡), two LTTs, an LTT‡ and a theater transport‡ (TT), or three TTs can set up a MB. Transports setting up a MB are subject to (308.453). This mission is also used to set up ISC pacification stations‡.

Rationale: Moving and setting up a MB have subtile differences.

Rule Extract from SO:

Quote:
(539.72) CARRYING PODs: ... Two theater transports, working together, can move a mobile base; installing it defers to (509.23) and would take three ships one turn or one ship three turns. A theater transport can carry (and deploy) one PDU or one base module.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, March 07, 2022 - 04:59 pm: Edit

(414.611) FEDS recommends CHANGING the rule to read:

(414.611) Transport: Each empire may use a convoy (or military convoy‡) to operationally move either a mobile base (MB), a ground base (PDU, PGB‡, or IDU‡), a mobile storm station (MSS‡), or up to three base modules (two hexes per turn for a convoy; three hexes for a military convoy‡) These convoy units cannot use strategic movement to transport bases.

Rationale: A convoy can only move two hexes operationally; a MilCon moves three hexes operationally.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, March 08, 2022 - 07:46 pm: Edit

(432.24) FEDS SUGGEST rewriting this rule to read:

(432.24) COST OF FIGHTERS ON HYBRID SHIPS: Hybrid ship (also known as casual carriers) pay one EP per fighter factor plus the cost of the unit itself; see SITs for specific production costs for these hybrid ships and their fighters. Many non-carrier Hydran ships, heavy war destroyers‡, and other ships as designated by rule use fighters but are not true carriers.

(432.241) If an empire converts a hybrid ship into a true carrier, they must pay one EP for each of the hybrid ship’s original fighters to reflect the higher usage rates of fighters on carriers.

(432.242) Free fighters received under (431.74) are “carrier” fighters and count double when producing hybrid ships. One “free carrier-fighter factor” could upgrade two hybrid fighters to carrier status. Free fighter factors can be used for Hydran X-ships‡ at the true carrier rate; see (523.52).

(432.25) COST OF FIGHTERS ON OVERBUILT SHIPS: When ships are overbuilt, the fighter costs are not doubled (431.32).

RATIONALE: The SITs now list the specific costs of building ships and their fighters making the calculus unnecessary and could lead to confusion.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, March 19, 2022 - 04:05 am: Edit

(509.25) FEDS Recommends adding the following rule:

(509.25) SPECIAL CASE TRANSPORTS: Some transports act as LTTs such as the Hydran PGZ and the Lyran CLT. These units cannot carry or use pods or pallets and cannot carry modules, mobile bases, or ground bases. They can otherwise be used as LTTs as permitted by rule.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, April 04, 2022 - 08:33 pm: Edit

(308.111) FEDS recommends amending the highlighted text below to this rule:

(308.111) To cripple an escort by Directed Damage requires a number of Damage Points equal to twice the escort’s defense factor, plus one point for each escort in the group (including the escort under attack). To destroy an escort by Directed Damage takes the number of points required to cripple it plus twice the crippled defense factor. There is no “per escort bonus” if the escort is crippled. Note that some ships in an escort group do not contribute to the escort bonus such as ad hoc escorts and crippled FCRs‡; units designated with an escort 'square' (515.3) on the active side of their counter (crippled/uncrippled) contribute to the escort protection bonus.

Rationale: Crippled FCRs and ad hoc escorts may serve as escorts but do not have the escort boxes needed to supply the escort bonus.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, April 11, 2022 - 06:26 am: Edit

(515.524) FEDS SUGGESTS rewriting this rule to read:

(515.524) CVAs and SCSs cannot be produced outside of a working capital shipyard hex

Original rule:

Quote:
(515.524) CVAs cannot be produced outside of a working capital shipyard hex.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, April 11, 2022 - 06:33 am: Edit

(436.3) FEDS SUGGESTS rewriting this rule to read:

(436.3) CONSTRUCTION FACILITY
All battleships must be built or converted at a starbase or stellar fortress‡ in the capital system. This does not reduce other scheduled construction.

Original rule for reference:

Quote:
(436.3) CONSTRUCTION FACILITY
All battleships are built at the starbase in the home (Klinshai) system. This does not reduce other scheduled construction.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, April 11, 2022 - 07:45 am: Edit

Chuck, See also (433.45) partially quoted below:

Quote:
(433.45) [Exception: the Romulans can make their one allowed CVA/SCS at Remus if they wish. (433.15)] There are some special cases. See (525.316) for the Hydran Iron Chancellor‡. A replacement for the capital shipyard can perform one major conversion if there is a starbase in the hex. See (525.67) for the Romulan ROC‡ and (525.4) for the Lyran DNP‡ and BCP‡, which are DN-sized PFTs not restricted to capital shipyard production.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, April 11, 2022 - 01:22 pm: Edit

Chuck also Major Conversion Facility could be used to convert a ship into a CVA under (450.123).

FEDS NON-CONCURS.

The rules state otherwise:

Quote:
(433.45) CARRIERS: Each empire is provided, in its production notes (under Order of Battle), with a certain number of carriers it can build each turn or each year. There may also be sub-limits on certain kinds of carriers. The production limits for carriers are fixed by the above-noted rules. There are no production limits for carrier escorts. CVA and SCS ships can only be produced (including conversions) in a capital shipyard. [Exception: the Romulans can make their one allowed CVA/SCS at Remus if they wish. (433.15)] There are some special cases. See (525.316) for the Hydran Iron Chancellor‡. A replacement for the capital shipyard can perform one major conversion if there is a starbase in the hex. See (525.67) for the Romulan ROC‡ and (525.4) for the Lyran DNP‡ and BCP‡, which are DN-sized PFTs not restricted to capital shipyard production.

(450.13) Location: Minor shipyards can be built at any major planet or at any starbase of the owning player not in the capital hex, even in an inactive fleet area.

Rule (433.45) is the specified rule that trumps rule (450.13). The only way this can happen is the conversion facility is built first and then a replacement capital is relocated there. In either case, rule (433.45) must be followed.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, May 10, 2022 - 02:48 am: Edit

303.4 appears to be in contradiction with 302.32.
Note that the SITs list PDU/PGBs as having a command rating of "0", but not 'NA' or '–'.

Quote:
(303.4) PLANETARY DEFENSE UNITS
PDUs and PGBs‡ cannot serve as flagships (and don’t need a flagship). If combat takes place at the planet (or capital system), the defenses of the planet are included in the Battle Force but do not count against the Command Rating.

(302.32) FLAGSHIP: Each player secretly selects one of his units to be the flagship of the Battle Force. (A base can be a flagship, but is still treated as a “non-ship unit”.) This must be one of the three units with the highest Command Ratings. (If four or more units have equal Command Ratings and this rating is the highest, any of them can be used.) Crippled units may be excused from this selection process at the owning player’s option, but the three highest-rated non-excused ships are known as the “flagship candidates”.
Note: There are cases in which an inferior force wants to do as little fighting as possible since it wants to avoid casualties. The player controlling such a force would naturally want to exclude as many “good” ships (important ships that are expensive to replace) from the battle as possible, but still must have a valid flagship. Units with a Command Rating of zero may be used as flagships (if they are one of the three highest rated) while units with no Command Rating (marked “NA” or “—”) can never be.

Possible solutions:

S1: Conform to (303.4) and change all SITs to a null command factor of 'NA' or '–'.

S2: Correct (303.4) to read:

While PDUs and PGBs‡ are small bases with a command rating of '0', they rarely served as flagships as a result.

FEDS Note 1: This rule is a legacy of the original 1986 rule set long before the ground combat rules and MMGs.

FEDS Note 2: A command rating (even if it is '0') is needed on PDU/PGBs as a Marine Major General could be on the PDU/PGB and would permit an additional auxiliary troop transport to be added to a small battle force; note that MMGs cannot operate from an auxiliary troopship per (316.146). This could happen in multi-round of combat is fought over a critical planet and the only remaining defending units are aux troop ships supplying marines to defend the planet.

FEDS Recommendation is S2.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, May 10, 2022 - 03:03 am: Edit

(302.322) does not address how independent attrition 'fleets" are affected by excluded flagships:

Old text:

Quote:
(302.322) If the only units in one “fleet” are fighters and/or PFs, that player has no flagship but three ship equivalents may be in the Battle Force; see (303.7). Note that this paragraph cannot apply if there are any ships or bases in the hex.